USA > Connecticut > Litchfield County > The bench and bar of Litchfield County, Connecticut, 1709-1909 : biographical sketches of members, history and catalogue of the Litchfield Law School, historical notes > Part 15
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34
"To the Hon. David Daggett, Chief Justice of the State of Connecticut. Sir :- The members of the Bar of the County of Litchfield, having heard from a communication which you made to the Legislature of the State at its last session that your judicial term of office service will expire by Constitutional limitation dur- ing the present year, and consequently not expecting to meet you again in your official character, beg leave to express to you the high sense which they entertain of the ability, integrity and impartiality, which you have manifested upon the bench, and to thank you cordially for the uniform kindness and courtesy with which you have treated them when they have had occasion to appear before vou to discharge the ardnous duties of their profession. In taking leave of you we cannot but recollect that it is now rising of forty years since you first formed a connection with the Bar of this County, and that you were long associated in practice with Adams, Reeve. Smith, Tracy. Allen, Kirby, Benedict, Slosson and South- mayde, whose bright names are inscribed on our records and whose memory will be cherished so long as learning. talent and virtue shall command esteem; nor can we forget that your labors may be traced in the very foundations of the judicial system of Connecti- cut. nor that you have exercised a happy influence in adorning that system with various learning. and in bringing it to its present matured condition.
We tender you our best wishes that the residne of your days may be as happy as your life has been heretofore distinguished and 'honorable.
Per order of the Bar.
Phineas Miner. Chairman. Geo. C. Woodruff. Clerk pro tem,
Litchfield. August 29th., 1834.
140
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
The following is the reply made by the Hon. David Daggett to the foregoing address.
"To the members of the Bar of Litchfield of the County of Litchfield :
Gentlemen :- 1 have received with high satisfaction the address signed by Phineas Miner and George C. Woodruff, Esquires, your Chairman and Secretary, which you did me the honor to communicate to me this day.
In taking leave of a Bar so distinguished, by the illustrious names inscribed on its records, it is impossible that I should not entertain a grateful recollection of the memories of those who are now away from all earthly scenes, and also cherish a lively affec- tion and respect for those who now occupy with such honor their places.
If my official conduct on the bench deserves the commendation bestowed upon it, much of it is justly due to the gentlemen of a Bar ever characterized by ability, integrity, industry and learning. Of your courtesy towards me and your gentlemanly deportment towards each other while engaged in the conflicts of the Bar, I cannot speak in terms sufficiently expressive of the feelings of my heart. They will be recollected with grateful affection. How much such an intercourse between the Bar and the bench tends to alleviate the burdens of the judicial station, can be known only by those who have had the pleasure to witness it.
I pray you to accept my fervent wishes for the prosperity and happiness of you individually, and my cordial thanks for this ex- pression of your esteem and respect.
David Daggett.
Litchfield, August 28th., 1834.
A true copy. Attest, Wm. P. Burrall, Clerk.
COURT EXPENSES.
In the earlier part of the century the Judges were given a cer- tain sum per day and their dinners.
Among the vouchers of the past the following bill of Court expenses appears.
The State of Connecticut : To Isaac Baldwin, Dr.
Superior Court, February Term, 1810.
$49.50
To ninety nine dinners for the Court
To 21 bottles of wine at IOS 35.50
12.75
To Brandy, Sugar, etc., 17 days at 4-6
.50
To Segars
.25
To paper
.2:
$98.75
To pipes and tobacco
1
GIDEON II. WELCHI.
141
HISTORICAL NOTES
THE COUNTY COURT.
Prepared by the late Wm. F. Hurlbut, Clerk.
The first Court organization in Litchfield County was the County Court, and for several years it was the principal trial court,-hav- ing criminal jurisdiction in all cases except those punishable by death, or imprisonment in the State Prison for life,-and civil juris- diction in law and equity where the matter in demand did not ex- ceed three hundred and thirty-five dollars, but a right of appeal to the Superior Court existed, in cases where the ad damnum exceeded two hundred dollars, or the title to land or right of way was in question, also raising or obstructing the water of any stream. river, creek or arm of the sea by erection of a dam, etc., which gave litigants the power to prevent a determination of causes by the County Court, and which the defeated parties availed themselves of to such an extent that most cases passed through both courts with a trial of facts in each, with the result that public opinion con- sidered the County Court of but little practical value. Therefore the legislature of 1855, abolished it and transferred all causes there- in pending to the docket of the Superior Court, causing that Court to be loaded with such a mass of business that it was impossible for a case to be tried within two years after being brought. This congestion of the docket of the Superior Court coupled with the inconvenience of travel to Litchfield (then the only County Seat) caused the organization in 1872 of the District Court for the First Judicial District, the district being composed of the towns of Bark- hamsted, Bridgewater, Canaan, Colebrook, Cornwall. Kent, New Hartford, New Milford, Norfolk, North Canaan, Salisbury, Sharon, Washington and Winchester. This Court continued to exist until 1883 when the remainder of the County desirous of enjoying the privilege afforded by it, the name was changed to the Court of Common Pleas and its jurisdiction extended to the entire County with sessions holden at Litchfield in addition to Winchester, New Milford and Canaan.
This was practically a revival of the old County Court with civil powers enlarged to cover causes demanding one thousand dol- lars damages but with no right of appeal to the Superior Court nor any criminal jurisdiction.
The Court of Common Pleas has been a popular court transact- ing a large majority of the litigation of the County with less ex- pense to the State and to parties than the same could have been done by the Superior Court.
1.12
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCHI AND BAR
JUDGES OF THE COUNTY COURT.
William Preston 1751-175-1
Ansel Sterling.
1838-1839
Woodbury
Sharon
John Williams,
Sharon
Plymouth
1754-1773
Calvin Butler.
1839-1840
Oliver Wolcott.
1773-1786
Ansel Sterling.
1840-1842
Litchfield
Sharon
Daniel Sherman.
1786-1791
William M. Burrall,
1842-1844
Woodbury
Canaan
Joshua Porter, Salisbury
1791-1808
Abijah Catlin, Ilarwinton
1844-1846
Aaron Austin, New Hartford
1808-1816
Elisha S. Abernethy, 1846-1847
Litchfield
Augustus Pettibone
1816-1831
Holbrook Curtiss.
1847-1849)
Norfolk
Watertown
David S. Boardman, 1831-1836 Hiram Goodwin,
1849-1850
New Milford
Barkhamsted
William M. Burrall, 1836-1838
1850-1851
Canaan
Hiram Goodwin, Barkhamsted
JUSTICES OF THE QUORUM.
John Miner, 1704-1716 John Sherman, 1723-1723
Woodbury Woodbury
John Sherman. 1708-1714 Joseph Miner. 1725-1739
Woodbury Woodbury
William Preston. Woodbury
1740-1751
THE FOLLOWING IN LITCHFIELD COUNTY.
Thomas Chipman, 1751-1753
Woodbury
John Williams, Sharon
1751-1754
Roger Sherman, 1759-1762
New Milford
Samuel Canfield. New Milford
1751-1754 Daniel Sherman, 1761-1786 Woodbury
Ebenezer Marsh, Litchfield
1751-1772
Bushnell Bostwick, 1762-1776
New Milford Joseph Bird, 1753-1754 Salisbury
Joshua Porter, Salisbury
1772-1791
Noah Hinman, Woodbury
1754-1759
Samuel Canfield, 1777-1790
New Milford
Elisha Sheldon,
1754-1759
Jedediah Strong, Litchfield
1780-1791
Litchfield
Charles B. Phelps,
Woodbury
1851-1856
Increase Moseley. 1755-1780 Salisbury
1
WILLIAM F. HURLBUT
143
HISTORICAL NOTES
Heman Swift. 1786-1802 Birdseye Norton, 1809-1812 Cornwall Goshen
Aaron Austin. 1790-1808 Augustus Pettibone, 1812-1815 New Hartford Norfolk
Nathan Hale. 1791-1809 Uriel Holmes, 1814-1817
Canaan
Litchfield
David Smith, Plymouth
1791-1814 Moses Lyman, Jr., 1815-1817
Goshen
Daniel N. Brinsmade. 1802-1818 Oliver Burnham.
Washington
Cornwall
Judson Canfield.
1808-1815Cyrus Swan, 1817-1819
Sharon
Sharon
Martin Strong, 1819-1820
Salisbury
ASSOCIATE JUDGES.
Martin Strong. 1820-1829 Morris Wodruff. 1829-1836
Salisbury
Litchfield
John Welch. 1820-1829
Hugh P. Welch, 1836-1838
Litchfield
Litchfield
William M. Burrall, 1829-1836
C'anaan
The Judges of the District Court were Roland Hitchcock, two years : Jared B. Foster, three years : Florimond D. Fyler, four years and Donald J. Warner, two years ; of the Court of Common Pleas Donald J. Warner, six years; Alberto T. Roraback, four years ; Arthur D. Warner, three and one half years : Alberto T. Roraback. five months ( when he was appointed to the Superior Court bencli) and Gideon H. Welch now ( 1907) holding the office.
The Clerks have been of the County Court Isaac Baldwin, 1751-1793 Frederick Wolcott, 1793-1836 Of the District Court and Court of Common Pleas Win. F. Hurlbut, twenty-two years Walter S. Judd, two years Wheaton F. Dowd, from 1901
1816-1818
Here Bells fremains
of the Hon
WILLJALE PRESTON EL
who fell a Hleep Sepr
In the 78 1 year
of his Life
JUDGE PRESTON'S MONUMENT IN WOODBURY
Trials
145
HISTORICAL NOTES
NOTED TRIALS.
Although the Courts are organized to remedy private wrongs and as such their proceedings are not matters of general history, yet these are sometimes of such a public nature and relate so closely to the general weal and welfare that they are properly a part of Court history, while of course Criminal trials are public property. Some of these have passed through the Courts of highest adjudica- tion and are very important.
The Attorney in preparing his brief in an action cannot have avoided noticing how often his references quote from some Litch- field County decision, especially in the earlier cases.
Those earlier Blackstones of our jurisprudence, Reeve, Gould, Church and Seymour laid their work on the deep foundations of the philosophy and truths of natural justice and common sense.
The early part of our records are of appeals from the County Court, motions for new trials, foreclosures, and a good many cases of Insolvency proceedings and cases of equitable nature. Very few trials of fact occur ; the judgments were rendered mostly after de- cisions upon demurrers, pleas in abatement and such preliminary pleadings. upon the determination of which we now have a right to answer over, and have a trial on the facts.
In the Criminal prosecutions, if the accused by any chance was acquitted he was discharged by paying the costs of his trial, and till 1835 the sentences of imprisonment were made to Newgate, now known as the Copper mines in Simsbury.
We append herewith a few of the memorable trials, and have probably omitted others of equally as valuable and important signifi- cance. The abstracts are necessarily very brief and condensed.
The first recorded case upon the books of the Superior Court is that of
AAbner Wheeler, of Bethlen
VS. Joshua Henshaw, of New Hartford.
In which the plaintiff recovered $642.75 damages and costs taxed at $49.86.
The first divorce granted was Lucy Mix of Salisbury against Thomas Mix.
These mixings and unmixings have formed a large per cent. of the judgments during the century.
THE SELLECK-OSBORN MATTER.
One of the most important trials and probably one that in its general results affected the State, especially the political part of it more than any other that has ever occurred in the State, was the Selleck-Osborn trial 1806-1807.
Benjamin Talmadge. Esq., was a Colonel in the Revolution and at the close of hostilities settled in Litchfield where he was a very
146
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
prominent citizen and for many years a member of Congress. Frederick Wolcott, who for more than forty years was the clerk of the County and Superior Courts, brought a suit against one William Hart of Saybrook and at the August Term of this court 1805 re- covered $2,205.00 damages. The case was taken to the Supreme Court and affirmed. Execution was issued and paid in full in 1806.
Selleck Osborn and Timothy Ashley were then publishing a newspaper in Litchfield called the Witness and made comments upon the judgment reflecting severely upon the integrity of the Court.
Whereupon the Superior Court prosecuted them as follows : "James Gould, Esq., Attorney for the State for the County of Litchfield specially appointed by this Court in this behalf filed an information before this Court, therein representing that Selleck Osborn and Timothy Ashley both now resident in Litchfield in County intending to bring the Superior Court of judicature of this State into disrepute and contempt and especially to induce a belief among the good people of this State that said Court in proceeding to and rendering judgment in a certain cause in which Benjamin Talmadge and Frederick Wolcott, Esquires were plaintiffs and William Hart, Esq., was defendant, and that the jury who attended said Court in finding a verdict in said cause were influenced by par- tial, dishonest and corrupt motives, did at Litchfield aforesaid on the 4th day of September 1805 with force and arms most unjustly wickedly and maliciously print and publish and cause to be printed and published of and concerning said Court and jury and of and concerning the proceedings in said cause in a publick newspaper called the Witness a certain false and scandalous libel purporting to be a statement or report of the aforesaid action of the evidence ad- duced therein and of the proceedings therein had which said infor- mation is as on file."
The defendants plead to the jurisdiction of the Court to which the attorney demurred and the Court decided that it had jurisdiction. It then went to the Court for trial on their plea of not guilty. They were found guilty and fined two hundred and fifty dollars each. Osborn in his statement of the numerous trials says that this one cost him $605.98. The libel suit of Julius Deming against him $346.46 and for slandering Thomas Colier he paid $522.00.
Osborn and Ashley were also fined in the County Court one hundred dollars for libelling Julius Deming a prominent merchant of Litchfield. Mr. Ashley paid his part but Mr. Osborn would not pay and was taken to jail. This aroused the Jeffersonians all over the County and State, they calling it a political martyrdom and on the 6th of August 1806, they gave him a great ovation forming a grand procession with cavalry and military parade passing by the jail where he was confined and saluting him with great honors. A part of the celebration was an address delivered in the meeting house by Joseph L. Smith, then a young lawyer of Litchfield. He made
147
HISTORICAL NOTES
remarks reflecting upon the Superior Court, consequently in due course of time the State's Attorney, Urial Holmes, Esq., issued an information against him for uttering "the following false, malicious, scandalous and defamatory words, viz: "The Courts of justice (meaning the aforesaid Courts of justice in this State) have re- garded the face of man in judgment. If the Republicans shall re- take the property which the Federal Courts (meaning the aforesaid Courts , magistrates, judges and justices of this State) have taken from them (meaning the said Republicans) it will be but a poor apology for the Federalists that they obtained it by false witnesses perjured judges and packed juries." Also "Osborn is imprisoned for publishing that of a Federal justice which is true of every Federal justice in the State."
Smith first plead not guilty, then the Court allowed him to change his plea to a demurrer. The Court found the information sufficient and fined Smith two hundred and fifty dollars and costs. one hundred and twenty three dollars and sixty four cents.
The clerk adds to the record. "The delinquint was delivered to the custody of the Sheriff of said County.'
Smith's connection with the Court was not altogether agreeable after that, but he was soon appointed Major in the United States Army and was a Colonel in the War of 1812 after which he was United States Judge in Florida. He was the ancestor of the con- federate General E. Kirby Smith.
BLASPHEMY.
At the August Term of the Court in 1809 William Leavenworth, Jr., was informed against for blasphemy in the town of Plymouth. The information stated "Who did in the presence and hearing of sundry of the good people of the State then and there assembled. blaspheme the name of God the Father and of the Holy Ghost, and deny and reproach the true God and His government of the world by wickedly and blasphemously uttering and speaking the words following, viz: 'I am the Holy Ghost and here is the Holy Ghost.' he the said William speaking of himself and meaning that he, said William was the Holy Ghost."
The accused was arrested, brought before the Court and plead not guilty, and after a trial was acquitted by the jury and the Clerk adds. "The said William was discharged by order of Court without the payment of costs."
This was a new departure, it having been customary for the prisoner to be obliged to pay the costs whether convicted or ac- quitted.
The following remarkable proceeding appears upon the record of our Courts, but the account herein given is from Gen. Sedg- wick's History of Sharon.
148
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
A WRONG VERDICT STANDS.
At a regimental training in Sharon on the 20th day of Sept., A. D. 1805 an altercation occurred between Zenas Beebe of Sharon and Aner Ives of Kent which was consummated by the stabbing of Ives by Beebe with a bayonet, inflicting a mortal wound of which he died at the end of a week. There were mitigating circumstances in the case which relieved Beebe from the charge of wilful murder, but it was a clear case of manslaughter. By a singular blunder of the foreman of the jury he was pronounced not guilty of any of- fense. The jury had agreed upon the verdict to be rendered to be "not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter." The foreman rendered the first part of the verdict but stopped there. The sub- sequent proceedings in the matter are copied from the records of the Court.
"AAfter the verdict was rendered the, foreman informed the Court that the verdict which the jury had intended to return and had agreed on was-that the said Beebe was not guilty of murder, but by mistake he had omitted to return and state the whole finding of the jury, and desired to be directed by the Court whether the verdict and the whole finding of the jury as agreed upon by them, and as he designed at first to have stated the same, would then be made and returned.
On consideration it was adjudged by the court that the verdict of the jury as returned and recorded by them could not be ex- plained or altered."
Beebe was defended by two of the ablest lawyers in the State Nathaniel Smith of Woodbury and David Daggett of New Haven.
At the Term of the Superior Court holden February, A. D. 1820. Beebe was tried for an assault with intent to kill Amasa Maxam and found guilty. He was sentenced to confinement in the Old Newgate prison for two years but died before the expiration of his sentence.
A SINGULAR INFORMATION FOR SLANDER.
In 1814, Elisha Sterling, Esq., then Attorney for the State for the County of Litchfield presented to the Court his information against a very prominent man of the County who was at that time Brigadier General of the State Militia.
The complaint was for libel upon his deceased father-in-law made by the General in the form of a "Funeral Order" and sent to one of the inferior officers of his regiment directing him to con- duct the funeral. The order is too wicked and vulgar to be pub- lished entire but a few extracts from it will show its general pur- port.
A FUNERAL, ORDER.
I have this day been informed that old is dead,
and I being out of health cannot attend the funeral. I therefore
149
HISTORICAL NOTES
give you this order and empower you to conduct it in the following order and I will pay the expense. First get a coffin made of Pepperidge Plank three inches thick and duftail it strong together with large Iron Spikes, Hoop it thick with Bars of Iron, make a winding sheet with sheet iron, braze it well Top and Bottom, make a Muffler with two hundred pounds of German Steel. Place a large Iron Screw on the top of his head extending through the Jaws so that the old fellow cannot open his mouth, next place on
a mule dressed in Regimentals with old sword and Epaulette which he wore at the time the British invaded New York, when he run and left his men twenty rods behind.
Raise four red or crimson Flags, place (certain neighbors) as pall bearers to blow Rams Horns, dress (other neighbors ) in Indian Stockings and Wampum and make them carry around Winkum or Cyder Brandy in large iron kettles to treat the procession, start by the shouting of Rams Horns until the walls fall in ( as they did in Jericho. Draw Ilim to . then blast a grave into a solid rock ten feet deep, put him in head downwards, place bars of iron thick across the grave, take a sledge, drive in stones, cement them with Plaster of Paris, so that the old Devil cannot get out, as he would make Quarrells and Disturbance until the Day of Judgment. Go to and get one hundred and fifty barrells of tar or pitch and twenty barrells of brimstone and burn around the door to keep off the devils until you perform this my order.
The information concludes as follows :-
"All of which was false, willful and malitious and done to blacken the memory of the said deceased and cast a stigma on his memory and on all others connected with him and excite his children to a breach of the peace and expose them to the hatred and contempt of the good people of this State: all which wrongdoings of the said are against the peace and dignity of this State contrary to law and a high crime and misdemeanor and of evil example to others in like manner to offend. Said attorney therefore prays the advice of the Honorable Court in the premises.
Elisha Sterling."
The indorsement is as follows :-
"James Gould and Noah B. Benedict assigned as counsel for the delinquint. Plea not guilty. On the jury for trial. The de- linquint changing, pleads guilty.
The Court adjudge that delinquint is guilty and that he pay a fine of $75 into the treasury of this State and the costs of this prosecution and stand committed until judgment be complied with. J. W. H., Clerk pro tem."
RABELLO TRIAL.
In the spring of 1835 a most horrible murder was committed in New Preston. A young lad of twelve years of age, son of Mr.
150
LITCHFIELD COUNTY BENCH AND BAR
Ferris Beardsley, was brutally murdered by a wandering fellow, a Portuguese by birth, for some fancied insult, claiming that the boy stepped on his toes. The trial commenced in August 1835 before Judges Waite and Williams. The proseenting attorney for the State was Leman Church assisted by George C. Woodruff. Esq., and the Court appointed Truman Smith and O. S. Seymour for the prisoner. The trial lasted several days and on the eighteenth of August 1835 the jury returned a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. The prisoner was committed to jail for safe keeping and remained there a number of years but was afterwards committed to State Prison for safe keeping. 3 He became a raving maniac and died in prison only a few years since. It was at that time a noted case and one of the earliest ones, now so common, of offering expert evidence on insanity.
The proceedings of the trial were published in pamphlet form.
BENNET WARD MURDER.
On the 23rd of November, 1846, Bennet Ward went into a store kept by W. B. Lonnsbury, he was somewhat intoxicated, became noisy and violent, threatened to whip several persons who were in the store, and began to throw fire among the dry goods that were disposed about the store. Among those present was George W. Smith. Ward finally proposed to whip him, and Smith seized a stick of wood from the wood box, and struck him over the left side of the head, causing a fracture in the skull five inches in length. He then kicked him out of the store and he fell upon the stoop. He got up however and wanted to fight, but the door was shut upon him. lle then went about a quarter of a mile, to an out house of David J. Stiles and staid there two nights, when he went into Mr. Stiles' house, and soon became insensible. In this condition he re- remained till his death, which occurred fifty-six hours after the blow was received. A post-mortem examination showed there was concussion and compression of the brain, besides a chronic inflamma- tion resulting from an old injury. Smith was arraigned for murder. February Term 1847. Hon. John H. Hubbard. State's Attorney and Hon. Charles B. Phelps, appeared for the State and Hons. Leman Church, G. H. Hollister and William Cothren appeared for the acensed. After an interesting trial. Smith was acquitted, on the ground that he acted in self defence.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.